Re: [timer] max timeout
Mark Frazer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: [...] > The output of `find . -type f | xargs grep 'jiffies +'` would suggest > that there are a few latent bugs as jiffies grows to values near the > top of its range. I guess this hasn't turned up as 0x7fff / (100 * > 3600 * 24) = 248.55. There were patches floating around a _long_ time ago (2.1-ish AFAIR) that allowed you to start your system at any jiffy. Many people checked out what happens on jiffie rollover then. Might be a good idea to do that again... -- Dr. Horst H. von Brand mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239 Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, ChileFax: +56 32 797513 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [timer] max timeout
Le Wed, 23 May 2001 16:58:15 +0200 (MET DST) Andrzej Krzysztofowicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a ecrit : > "sebastien person wrote:" > > Is it bad to do the following call ? > > > > mod_timer(, jiffies+(0.1*HZ)); > > Yes, it is bad. Don't use floating point in the kernel if you don't need. So, there is a good solution to fire the timer after 100 ms ? And is there any max limitation on the expires value ? e.g. what is the biggest time period we could have between timer call and the execution of the timer function ? > > > that might fire the timer 1/10 second later. > > HZ/10 is much better ... > > -- > === > Andrzej M. Krzysztofowicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] > phone (48)(58) 347 14 61 > Faculty of Applied Phys. & Math., Technical University of Gdansk > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [timer] max timeout
Le Wed, 23 May 2001 16:58:15 +0200 (MET DST) Andrzej Krzysztofowicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] a ecrit : sebastien person wrote: Is it bad to do the following call ? mod_timer(timer, jiffies+(0.1*HZ)); Yes, it is bad. Don't use floating point in the kernel if you don't need. So, there is a good solution to fire the timer after 100 ms ? And is there any max limitation on the expires value ? e.g. what is the biggest time period we could have between timer call and the execution of the timer function ? that might fire the timer 1/10 second later. HZ/10 is much better ... -- === Andrzej M. Krzysztofowicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone (48)(58) 347 14 61 Faculty of Applied Phys. Math., Technical University of Gdansk - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [timer] max timeout
Mark Frazer [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: [...] The output of `find . -type f | xargs grep 'jiffies +'` would suggest that there are a few latent bugs as jiffies grows to values near the top of its range. I guess this hasn't turned up as 0x7fff / (100 * 3600 * 24) = 248.55. There were patches floating around a _long_ time ago (2.1-ish AFAIR) that allowed you to start your system at any jiffy. Many people checked out what happens on jiffie rollover then. Might be a good idea to do that again... -- Dr. Horst H. von Brand mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239 Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, ChileFax: +56 32 797513 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [timer] max timeout
"sebastien person wrote:" > Is it bad to do the following call ? > > mod_timer(, jiffies+(0.1*HZ)); Yes, it is bad. Don't use floating point in the kernel if you don't need. > that might fire the timer 1/10 second later. HZ/10 is much better ... -- === Andrzej M. Krzysztofowicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone (48)(58) 347 14 61 Faculty of Applied Phys. & Math., Technical University of Gdansk - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [timer] max timeout
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 04:28:01PM +0200, sebastien person wrote: > Is it bad to do the following call ? > > mod_timer(, jiffies+(0.1*HZ)); Yes very bad. gcc will generate a floating point add for that, corrupting the user process' floating point context. -Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[timer] max timeout
Hi, is there a max timeout to respect when I use mod_timer ? or add_timer ? Is it bad to do the following call ? mod_timer(, jiffies+(0.1*HZ)); that might fire the timer 1/10 second later. Thanks. sebastien person - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[timer] max timeout
Hi, is there a max timeout to respect when I use mod_timer ? or add_timer ? Is it bad to do the following call ? mod_timer(timer, jiffies+(0.1*HZ)); that might fire the timer 1/10 second later. Thanks. sebastien person - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [timer] max timeout
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 04:28:01PM +0200, sebastien person wrote: Is it bad to do the following call ? mod_timer(timer, jiffies+(0.1*HZ)); Yes very bad. gcc will generate a floating point add for that, corrupting the user process' floating point context. -Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [timer] max timeout
sebastien person wrote: Is it bad to do the following call ? mod_timer(timer, jiffies+(0.1*HZ)); Yes, it is bad. Don't use floating point in the kernel if you don't need. that might fire the timer 1/10 second later. HZ/10 is much better ... -- === Andrzej M. Krzysztofowicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone (48)(58) 347 14 61 Faculty of Applied Phys. Math., Technical University of Gdansk - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
